Amber Heard files 16-point argument for her appeal against Johnny Depp's defamation win

Amber Heard and her new legal team have filed new arguments in her appeal against her ex-husband Johnny Depp's defamation win against her in June.

The appeal documents outline a 16-point argument that Heard's legal team believes prove that the previous ruling was unlawful.

In the documents, Heard's lawyers claim the trial had a lack of 'clear and convincing evidence' for malice, which is one of the standards that need to be met to prove defamation.

Appeal documents filed Tuesday. #AmberAppeals #JusticeForAmberHeard pic.twitter.com/8ZfSCWIGoU

— 𝒴𝒪𝒰 𝒜𝑅𝐸 𝐻𝐸𝒜𝑅𝒟 (@iBelieveYouA) October 12, 2022

The documents, seen by the Daily Mail, also call out the court's alleged failure to invalidate the damages awarded to both Heard and Depp after the court found that the couple had defamed each other. 

The damages were described as 'inherently and irreconcilably inconsistent'.

The document argues that Depp's allegations against the Aquaman star should have solely focused on the op-ed piece.

The court filing goes on to say that trial Judge Penny Azcarate wrongly treated Heard’s pieces as 'actionable as statements of fact rather than non-actionable expressions of opinion'.

Essentially, Heard's team is putting forward an argument that the Aquaman star should have been protected by the First Amendment and that her ex-husband had no case against her as he was never named in the op-ed piece. 

The appeal document reads: "The trial court erred in denying the motion to set aside the jury's verdict with regard to Mr. Depp's failure to prove that the allegedly defamatory statements in the challenged op-ed each conveyed a defamatory meaning about him by implication and that any such implication was both designed and intended by Ms. Heard."

Heard has also taken issue with the implication that she had written the op-ed piece headline 'I spoke up against sexual violence—and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change'.

Headlines are often written by the newspaper or magazine editor or sub editor.

Heard claims she did not pen the headline.

A Virginia jury unanimously found in favour of Johnny Depp, finding that what Amber Heard wrote in her op-ed piece for The Washington Post was defamatory, and awarded him USD$15 million ($AUD 20.6 million, £11.9 million) in damages.

The jury awarded Heard USD$2 million ($AUD 2.7 million £1.5 million) in compensatory damages, finding that in her countersuit, Heard did not prove all elements of defamation.

These charges were later capped at USD$10.35 million (AU $14.2 million, £8.2 million) by Judge Penny Azcarate.